Allowed

Vechalapu.Gopi v. the State of A.P.

Telangana HC9 Mar 2018CRLP/2242/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, Andhra Pradesh, considered a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. filed by four accused persons. Granting anticipatory bail, the court directed surrender within 15 days, execution of personal bonds, and adherence to standard bail conditions. Pending miscellaneous petitions stand closed.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; surrender within 15 days; personal bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties to SHO; abide by Section 438(2) conditions.

Vechalapu.Gopi Vs the State of A.P. — Bail and Remand | Telangana HC (2018)

¶1

HIGII COURl' oF Jt:l)tc.\1 uRl.. .\T II't)[R.\BAI) FOR THIi SI-.,\TIi OF^'f ELA CAN,\ .\Nl)'ltlIi S1 .{1'l'l Oli r}..DlIIt,\ PItr\I)l'lSll FRIDA -lHE N INI'tl DAY OF M;\t{C'll TWO I IOLJSAND AND EIGHTEtiN

¶2

: l'll llS l. 'l-:

¶3

TIIE HO\ llll-E S\l'1 .,lt.S'l l( l! 1. R..1 \I

¶4

CRII{INN rL Pl'l'l'lTl0N^{NO:22-12OF 20ltt}

¶5

Betrveen:

¶6

I . Vechalapu Gopi S/o Ran-ra Rlao^{( A-7 )}

¶7

Komml llajesh S/o Nageshr,f^{ala Rlo, (A-ti)}

¶8

G.Krislrna Rao. S/o Babu Rulr. (A-9)

¶9

A.SV. Ilanganada Rao S/o S[rya Vor.rkata Ranganacla ll.ao (A- 10)

¶10

l)et it ionels,/A ccuscd Nos. 7 to l0

¶11

A1"vD

¶12

The State ol'Andlrra Pradesli, tlrroLrgh SHO. Pcndurthl'Police St:rtion, V isaklrapat nr rr.r Lrtor, IIigh⁽ oLrft of llydcral)ld.

¶13

Respondent

¶14

Petition undcr Section 4.18 of'Cr.P.C.. praying that in the circumstanccs statetl in the pct l ), the t{igh Court mav bc grlcased to grant tliem anticipatory biril the cvcnt of'their arrest in connectiorr ri,itli C'r. No. 933 of 20I fiee^{Stati.'rr.irt the irrtcrcsl ol.iuslicc.}

¶15

Counscl lbr thc Petitioncrs Sltl C IJAt.;\li{N I :l'lNI{AT Y.\D,\'

¶16

Counscl lbr thc Rcspondent PTII}LIC PROSF]CI.JTOR, (AI')

¶17

The Corrrt nrrdc the follotv ng:

¶18

THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T. RAJANI

¶19

CRIMINAL PETITION N0.2242 of 2018

¶20

ORDER:

¶21

This petition is filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, who are A7 to A10 in Crime No.933 of 2Ol7 on the file of Pendurthy Police Station, Visakhapatnam District.

¶22

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent- State.

¶23

Today, by virtue of order in Cr1.P.No.22l2 of 2018, this Court granted anticipatory bail to A1. Counsel for the petitionersr'' t'/ with regard to presence of these petitioners"submits ./ that ,A4 is in the habit of collecting amounts from innocent people and these petitioners are implicated in this case falsely. He also files copy of promissory note, which is executed in favour of one Gopi, who is the 1't petitioner herein. Counsel submits that with regard to the said promissory note, A'2 deposited some amount in the account of the 1"t petitioner herein and as such, taking advantage of the said deposit, he manipulated the records as if these petitioneffivolved in the offence. Pima facie, it appears that there is truth in the contention of the counsel for the petitioners. Therefore, the petitioners can be granted bail.

¶24

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. The petitioners are directed to surrender before the Station House Officer, Pendurthy Police Station, Visakhaptnam District, within 15 days from the date of this order. On such surrender, the petitioners shal1 be released on bail on

¶25

\ o9-

¶26

¶27

each of them executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.20,0OO/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) with two sr-rreties in a like sum each to the satisfaction of the said Station House Officer. Further, on such release, the petitioners shal1 abide by the conditions mentioned under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C., as under:

¶28

i) The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when reqr.rired.

¶29

ii) The peti.tioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person 4cquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶30

iii) The petitioners shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

¶31

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, in this petition sha11 stand closed. - i^{, 'n;}

¶32

To n Magist^{ntc,Visakhlllatuatl.t}

¶33

l. The^{lll MetroPolita} Visakhapltnarr^C'itY 2. 3. Tltc^{Trvo Stltion C('s to HousePublic} Otficct.Prosectlt cL. ntlLrrthi (;\P)^{lligh l)trlicc Stlttiott'CourtofJ urlicature,at I{Yderalrad (OUT)} 4. one^{CC to Sri Chal} akani^V liat^Yarl av, Advocatc^(Ol,t,c) 5. or.re^{SPare CoPY}

HIGTI COUITT

TR.J

DATE:09-3-20ltl

ORDI.]R

cRt-.I'. NO.^{2242 0F 2018}

¶39

DII{EC'f IO\

¶40

'!
j

Vechalapu.Gopi v. the State of A.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vechalapu.Gopi v. the State of A.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kaladindi Sanyasi Raju, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Karakula Gangaprasad or Prasad Vs State of Ap.

Kodi Ajay Kumar , Pandu and another Vs State of Ap.

S.Munisekhar Vs State of Ap.

M.B.Vijaya Kumar Vs State of Ap.

Chandra Shekar Vs State of Telangana